RTX A400 vs ATI FireGL X1-256

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the rankingnot rated417
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data15.71
ArchitectureRage 8 (2002−2007)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameR300GA107
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date1 July 2002 (22 years ago)16 April 2024 (less than a year ago)

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA coresno data768
Core clock speed325 MHz727 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1762 MHz
Number of transistors110 million8,700 million
Manufacturing process technology150 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)37 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate2.60042.29
Floating-point processing powerno data2.706 TFLOPS
ROPs816
TMUs824
Tensor Coresno data24
Ray Tracing Coresno data6

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

InterfaceAGP 8xPCIe 4.0 x8
Lengthno data163 mm
Width1-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeDDRGDDR6
Maximum RAM amount256 MB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed310 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth19.84 GB/s96 GB/s

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors2x DVI, 1x S-Video4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX9.0 (9_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.7
OpenGL2.04.6
OpenCLN/A3.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA-8.6

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 July 2002 16 April 2024
Maximum RAM amount 256 MB 4 GB
Chip lithography 150 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 37 Watt 50 Watt

ATI FireGL X1-256 has 35.1% lower power consumption.

RTX A400, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 21 year, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1775% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between FireGL X1-256 and RTX A400. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


ATI FireGL X1-256
FireGL X1-256
NVIDIA RTX A400
RTX A400

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


No user ratings yet.

Rate FireGL X1-256 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 12 votes

Rate RTX A400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.